“Erasing Hell” with Francis Chan

Publisher’s description:

“In this groundbreaking new book, Francis Chan and Preston Sprinkle take on the topic of hell and our eternal destiny, with a sense of humility and a deep respect for the inspired Word of God. They will address questions such as “Will everyone be saved?” and “Does God Get What He Wants in the End?” as well as reviewing in depth, everything Jesus said about Hell.

However, the authors warn that we have to guard ourselves against “a heartlessness” when we talk about this theology and this doctrine, because ultimately this about people. Chan and Sprinkle lay all the evidence on the table and present all the facts from Scripture, so that people can decide what to believe for themselves.” source, emphasis added

While Rob Bell appears to be “arrogant” and depending on “human reason and persuasion” in Love Wins, we have Francis Chan and his co-author in Erasing Hell, taking a “humble orthodoxy” approach, even quoting Psalm 25:9.

Though I have mixed feelings about the way Francis Chan has positioned himself against Rob Bell in this video clip, his “laying the evidence on the table and letting the reader decide” and “fasting and praying” to get Hell right—seem fair to me.

Then, we have Mark Galli, senior editor of Christianity Today, with his response to Bell’s Love Wins forthcoming—God Wins: Heaven, Hell, and Why the God News Is Better than Love Wins.

Let’s call it the year of Hell!

36 responses to ““Erasing Hell” with Francis Chan”

Peter Kirk

May 27, 2011

T.C., what makes you think that Chan will come out against Bell? Are you simply presupposing, before reading the book, that the conclusions from a study “with a sense of humility and a deep respect for the inspired Word of God” will be entirely “orthodox” and traditional? Are you claiming that Bell is more lacking than all of his opponents in this “humility and a deep respect”?

Now it may well be that Chan will end up disagreeing with Bell in some ways (as I do). But I suspect that he will also come out with at least some reservations with the “orthodox” idea that God condemns the great majority of humanity to everlasting conscious torment. Of course we won’t know for sure until someone reads the book – and I wonder if it has even been written yet.

Jon Hughes

May 27, 2011

I’m amazed that we’re even having this debate on an evangelical blog. Hell is real and eternal. We need to accept it, and get on with seeking to reach the lost. God can deal with the enormity of it. We can trust Him, that as Judge of all the earth He will do what is right. We can then go out, proclaiming without shame or embarrassment the very good news that presupposes bad news.

We’ve got to seriously ask ourselves how much we are being influenced by the softly softly, therapeutic culture in which we live in these ‘discussions’ of ours.

Reply
1. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 27, 2011
  
  Amen Jon,
  
  The “emergents” are here to ‘fluff up the pillow’! And put the lost to sleep, instead of the real challenge and truth of Scripture! The doctrine and depth of Hell is simply God’s!
T.C. R

May 27, 2011

Peter,

I’m not presuming to have read Chan’s book. But a person simply has to listen to this clip and realize what is going on. Chan has already given the impression where he’s going with this. I think that’s clear.

Jon,

While I agree with you, Rob Bell Love Wins is #46 at Amazon.com. Chan and Galli are aware of this influence of Bell. They are both in disagreement. This is part of the problem. In other words, Bell’s influence must be stopped, in a way.

Reply

Brian LePort

May 27, 2011

I don’t have any disagreement with Chan over whether there is a hell, but I think the rhetorical move at the beginning is not likely to give him an audience with anyone other than those with whom he already agrees.

First, he misinterprets Rom. 9 (in my opinion) making it about the destiny of individual sinners and saints rather than a narrative about how God has gracefully brought forth a remnant from that stubborn ball of clay called Israel. Second, he says, in gist, “God’s ways and thoughts are above your own, so you will likely disagree with my understanding of hell.” Unless someone isn’t paying attention this move was a tad too obvious.

That being said, since Bell wrote a book Chan may as well do so too. I guess there is an audience for Bell and Chan as theologians so why not. But I agree T.C., this has now been (at least doctrinally speaking) the “year of hell”.

irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert

May 27, 2011

Chan is maybe something of a “theologian”? But Bell? No way! This is just pop culture theology! And sadly little driven by the desire to really understand the Holy Scripture!

Reply
T.C. R

May 27, 2011

Brian,

I think Chan has not only misinterpreted Romans 9 but Isaiah 55 as well. The context of Isaiah 55 is not approaching what Chan has in mind.

Reply
Nicholas

May 30, 2011

Brian and TC, Romans 9 is most certainly about individual sinners and saints. Simply put, God alone decides who will be saved and who will not. See also Romans 8:27-34, Ephesians 1:1-2:9, John 6:37-65, and Acts 13:48, just to name a few.

Reply
1. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 31, 2011
  
  It is both, and amen.. the Gospel does not side aside the covenants with Israel! Both spiritual and natural “Israel”. God will save HIS elect from both.
2. T.C. R
  
  June 1, 2011
  
  Fair enough. But what is Romans 9 primarily about?
3. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  June 1, 2011
  
  That was *set aside

John

May 27, 2011

Thanks, TC…this was the first I heard about it.

I just pre-ordered it. I am especially looking forward to Sprinkle’s contribution.

Penny

May 27, 2011

I’m exhausted just by thinking of more debate over this topic. I used to think this a was “conversation” that was happening late at night among close friends anyway, and that it was time to bring it out in the open in the evangelical world. I’m just not sure that is what has happened . All I see is that most people are talking over each other and not listening for fear of getting infected with some heresy virus or some preconceived idea of what the “other” believes. Sorry for venting in your comment section T.C. I just wish that the whole “conversation” around Love Wins was going in a more productive and graceful direction.

irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert

May 27, 2011

Penny,

You just cannot “sanctify” bad thinking or so-called theology! It never edifies the real Body of Christ! (2 Tim. 2: 16, etc.)

Reply
T.C. R

May 27, 2011

John,

You’re welcome. It’s the first I’ve heard of Sprinkle.

Penny,

Such venting is welcome around here. 😉

Well, we’ll just have to wait and see, but it’s good that we’re talking hell in a sense, given the feel good religious climate of our day.

Reply
1. Penny
  
  May 28, 2011
  
  Don’t get me wrong Fr. Robert, I want everyone to be able to come to the table and talk about it. I just don’t see actual “communication.” I just see people claiming to be “Right” and not listening, and that hits a button with me. I think there is more agreement than people are willing to admit and I think it would be helpful it we could start there and then try and graciously listen to the issues where there is more nuanced opinion. I think Love Wins was pretty clear that Bell believes in Hell. I think Chan believes in Hell. I can’t understand why this has to be a “debate.” I’d like to see a “discussion” instead.
  
  T.C., I hear about this “feel good” climate, but I certainly haven’t come across it. I wonder if the Pharisees thought Jesus was “feel good”? I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m guessing some where out there, some church is “feel good,” but I’ve never had a conversation with anyone who goes to one. Most places I know are so terrified of the “risky” idea of grace that legalism is the king theology. 😉
  
  Thanks for letting me vent. 🙂
2. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 28, 2011
  
  Penny,
  
  I am not really one of those that it is.. ‘hell or the highway’. In fact the Anglican Communion, has always had even some good conservatives who have held to some very different views on the nature of Hell. Note closer to my time: Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, who comes close to an annihilationist position, and also the well known E.W. Bullinger, the same. But this position does not hold to any idea of universalism however, and judgment is real, but not everlasting. In this position, man was made for everlasting life, but only those who believe in the love and grace of God, find everlasting life. Those who do not find eternal death & ruin, and after their personal judgment, are no more! I am in fact open to this idea and position myself, but with the language of Jesus, the issue does seem to be an eternal one. (Lk. 16: 19-31, note verse 26. / Matt. 25: 46). But the Scripture does seem to indicate that now “the wicked dead in hades, and the righteous dead “at home with the Lord,” alike await the resurrection.” (Job 19:25 / 1 Cor.15:52 / Acts 24:15)
  
  My point with Bell, and his book.. is that it is just sloppy thinking and poor theology! There are other books that are much better on this subject.
Penny

May 28, 2011

Fr. Robert, if you you felt the book supported Universalism, then I can totally understand your position. I felt it supported Inclusivism, but not Universalism. I felt he was pretty clear he believed in Hell, and that not everyone would be in Heaven. I totally agree that there are better books written on the subject as well.

Reply
1. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 28, 2011
  
  Penny,
  
  He opened the door toward Universalism, and in a pop-culture sort of way! Just bad theology in my opinion! And note, I do believe the so-called Evangelical Church, is certainly in an apostate slide!

Jerry B

May 27, 2011

Uh-mph! I read Bell’s book, does this mean I have to read Chan’s book too for balance and objectivity? I guess this is the Chan and Clan saying without saying “this is what Bell should have said”. Which is fine, but I agree with earlier comments, It isn’t going to find much of an audience outside of those who already like Chan and agree with him. Bell’s appeal is much wider.

I didn’t see Love Wins as arrogant nor dependent on human reasoning (though to some degree aren’t all attempts at theology human reasoning).

T.C. R

May 27, 2011

Jerry,

Don’t forget God Wins by Mark Galli, which is a direct response to Bell’s Love Wins.

Yes, there’s no such thing as pure, unbiased theologizing. Chan is assuming too much here.

Reply
1. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 27, 2011
  
  TC,
  
  What is needed is less, oh much less “human” theologizing, and a Biblical theologizing, if you will! God, my God..is dealing with mine right now! Note, 1 Cor. 3: 10-15, etc. The “wood, hay & stubble.” ! We all no doubt have much of that! 😉
2. irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert
  
  May 27, 2011
  
  Too often, indeed, I feel like we have “waders” on.. on the blogs! Were just too deep in mere human thought! 😉

T.C. R

May 27, 2011

Fr. Robert,

This is what Francis Chan is arguing. But there’s not such thing as an unbiased approach to theologizing.

kenny chmiel

May 27, 2011

He moves his hands a lot

T.C. R

May 28, 2011

|T.C., I hear about this “feel good” climate, but I certainly haven’t come across it. I wonder if the Pharisees thought Jesus was “feel good”? I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m guessing some where out there, some church is “feel good,” but I’ve never had a conversation with anyone who goes to one. Most places I know are so terrified of the “risky” idea of grace that legalism is the king theology.|

Penny,

There are preachers who would not preach hell because their board has told them not to. Why? They don’t want to offend people, especially the big givers. I’m not making this up.

Kenny,

He’s a preacher. 😀

Penny

May 29, 2011

I’m guessing this in more main line demons? We aren’t talking about the SBC I’m guessing. Don’t worry, I totally trust you know about this stuff. 😉 Down here in my neck of the woods, people just seem to be crazy in love with Hell. It is hard to imagine the reverse!

Reply
1. T.C. R
  
  May 30, 2011
  
  Penny,
  
  It could even be geographical when it comes to these emphases. 😉

Elsewhere (05.30.2011) « Near Emmaus

May 30, 2011

[…] – T.C. Robinson labels 2011 “the year of hell” here. […]

Simon

June 7, 2011

When Francis talks about the “lake of fire” in Revelation, is he taking this description as a concrete reality? Because anyone who has read Revelation in its entirety knows that the book is highly symbolic and to take things literally leads to all sorts of bad readings. Does God literally have a “book of life” with the names of all those who are saved? I’ve found that we’ve really got to be careful about over-literalizing scripture. I find that the Eastern Orthodox Church’s posistion on hell to be liberating as well as biblical. Also their whole approach to interpreting scripture is also enlightening. The traditional Protestant approach, like it or not, has been to use proof texts. Later Protestant scholars would then exegete with this pre-determined position in mind. Whether they like it or not, it’s their environment, what they’ve been taught before etc that also influences how the read scripture. So it is really tradition that dictates a lot of Protestant belief. The EOC rejoice in their ancient tradition, with the belief that holy scripture is a product of that tradition (something I’m grappling with myself having been born and bred on the doctrine of sola scriptura). So to find that, in the EOC tradition, hell is not a literal place of eternal burning etc is really refreshing. They also have a case exegetically. The Western church is totally unable to explain why the concept of eternal hell fire is never found in the Old Testament. Additionally, why do the words Jesus used to describe hell have to be taken literally? He uses a number of metaphors in my opinion. Some of which are incompatible if taken as concrete reality. E.g. “outer darkness” and “lake of fire”. Which one is reality?

Also when Francis implies that it is the proponents on our side of the argument that want to make God think like us, I think he’s being a little dishonest. God has revealed to us, in scripture, what his character is like. The simplest statement in scripture of God’s character is found in 1 John 4: God is love. Perfect holiness, perfect righteous consist of perfect unselfish love and nothing else. This is the consistent testimony of all of scripture. so then we might well ask: If God is love, how could he create an eternal torture chamber for his creation? Or is hell, perhaps, a reality we create for ourselves when we reject God? A number of good scholars are taking the former position – and not just the emergents. NT Wright seems to be coming around to the EOC view of hell too. So, as Francis points out, the issue of hell is not as straightforward as many would have it. There are different interpretations of hell. I think the EOC is valid. It is also a very old tradition – so the argument that it is something new will just not wash. And I think it portrays God in a way that is faithful to scripture.

Simon

June 8, 2011

I agree with Francis that God’s idea of justice is not what humans normally think of justice. And it is not our side of the argument that has forced God into this kind of justice. For the Western church, God’s justice is punitive. A very extreme form of punitive justice at that. For the Eastern church, God’s justice is restorative. Justice and mercy go together and are not opposites. That is why there is so much focus on love and forgiveness in the New Testament. God wants to put the world to rights. Restore creation. Not throw this world in the trash can and rapture the elect into some dualistic heavenly realm. God wants to be among his people. He wants his people to bring a little slice of heaven into the world now, in anticipation for when God will finally right all the wrongs. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth…. That is why caring about creation is imperative. That is why showing kindness and mercy to all (not just the “brothers” as the extreme modern Calvinists in America would have it) is important. That is why forgiveness is vital. That is why Christians should care about poverty and social justice. God’s justice demands that Christians actually do something to make the world a better place – in a wholistic way. For example, you just can’t pick on the topic of abortion in isolation of a number of issues that are interconnected with it. John Piper likes to say that abortion is a racial issue because it’s mostly blacks and latinos that get it done. Well the issue is not just abortion John! Blacks have disproportionate representation in jails (never hear a peep about this issue from conservative evangelicals), are more likely to be unemployed etc. This underlying problem that connects all these issues is that there a social justice problem and conservative evangelicals couldn’t really care less about the root causes. Too often they are against policies that would make life better for the poor. They just cherry pick at the “moral” issues like abortion as if these existed independently of all others. It’s hyper moralism pure and simple. John Piper likes to say future generations will condemn him for doing nothing on abortion. That they will John. They will also condemn conservative evangelicals like you because you did nothing for the underlying problems of the poor. The evangelical right does not seek the healing and the restorative justice of God. Instead they see jutice as punitive punishment, now and for eternity, against those who do not live up to some hyper-morals they impose on others – not God.

irishanglican ~ Fr. Robert

June 8, 2011

This is itself a biased opinion, rather than a real biblical and exegetical approach! And almost nothing said about the Judeo truth. Were not here to judge Piper or Evangelicalism! That must be left to God!

Reply
1. Simon
  
  June 8, 2011
  
  I have given my opinion you are right. Perhaps it is biased. Although I do think that my opinion is based on the grand narrative of scripture. I do think making statements like the one I made above is better than proof texting, which is the great disease of Calvinism and, to a lesser extent, a lot of Protestant world. Justice is not synonymous with punishment. Justice, in the bible, means to set the world to right, correct imbalances as per NT Wright’s book on Justification. I do think his wholistic approach to justice and the gospel more generally is supported in scripture. So there is ancient tradition and exegesis to support my opinion. Furthermore, at some point, we’ve got to get to where the rubber hits the road. We need to look at the fruits of different teachings. Hell, a particularly draconian view of substitionary atonement, hyper-moralism, extremely literal renderings of scripture etc have been responsible for a lot of modern atheism and alienation of educated young people. And lastly anything that contradicts the love and mercy of God must be held in suspicion.

Collision of Souls

June 14, 2011

‘If we believe not, yet he stays faithful: He cannot deny Himself.’ 2 Timothy 2:13

Are you sure such a teaching on hell is not making you an enemy of the cross? (Philippians 3: 18-19) I thought I was sure. I was an evangelical preacher for 7 years, who preached hell, but then the Holy Spirit stormed into my life. God loves us even if we don’t love him back. His love and justice demand He save us, because we must be saved(Acts 4:12), but we have no innate capacity to save ourselves(Romans 3:13). It’s His grace and His faith that saves us (Ephesians 2:8, Gal. 2:20). Even Sodom will be restored (Ezekiel 16:55), for the Lord can not cast off forever. (Lamentations 3: 31-32) God will have all to be saved. (1 Tim. 2:4 KJV).

God doesn’t tell us to forgive 70×7 but then not forgive Himself. It’s silly to think that He would ask us to outperform Him. Think about it.

http://www.isleofexile.blogspot.com

stillagirl

June 14, 2011

With all the time I’ve just wasted reading what believers think about what other believers said, how many more real, live people could i have served and introduced to the God who really wants to save them from hell as well as themselves? Get back to the real task people. Bell and Chan are doing their jobs to some extent but I am not sure even Jesus himself would approve of how much time believers have spent vilifying each other and arguing about this. Love God. Love your neighbor. Get to work.

Quest for Truth

June 17, 2011

I would like to add the following scriptures to Collision of Souls’ list:

“For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” (I Corinthians 15:22)

“But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.” (John 12:32)

“Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.” (Romans 5:18)

“God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. … For from him and through him and to him are all things.” (Romans 11:32,36a)

“For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in [Christ], and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.” (Colossians 1:19-20)

“By myself I have sworn, my mouth has uttered in all integrity a word that will not be revoked: Before me every knee will bow; by me every tongue will swear.” (Isaiah 45:23)

“I will not accuse forever, nor will I always be angry, for then the spirit of man would grow faint before me — the breath of man that I have created.” (Isaiah 57:16)

““Then I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing: ‘To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!’” (Revelation 5:13)

“Who will not fear you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed.” (Revelation 15:4)

“All you have made will praise you, O Lord.” (Psalm 145:10a)

In fact, here’s a list of 186 scriptures which confirm that God will not fail to “save that which was lost:”

http://www.hopebeyondhell.net/Hope-for-All.html

New Leaven